has been criticized for not participating in the aib. but when aib was first formulated, there were a lot of questions as for what kind of regulations and what kind of government structures aib will be following and whether the bank will indeed be a -- another chinese policy bank funded primarily by the chinese budget. or it will be a multilateral development bank that follows the setup, international norms. so for those things that take time to see what the institution looks like. and for the projects aib has funded so far is probably not going to be a short-term observation. so i think bill is absolutely right. the u.s. faces a question that do you want to join without knowing what it is? and without knowing what is in play there? or do you want to join early on to also help to shape what the rules will look like. >> right. some might say the trump administration's tendency is more transactional. so they don't necessarily take that longer view and aren't willing to invest in the rule-building on a regional basis. bill, you mentioned th

whether or not that means the united states decides to join the aib, that gets into broader strategicssues as well, but i know there will be an ask and push and they will consider it. caroline: and maybe the quid pro quo is you come into the aib, iib, and maybea tentatively, potentially china can't invest more even in u.s. infrastructure. we are seeing chinese money flow into startups in the united states. i am thinking of lyft. i am thinking of snap, taking money from chinese companies. how important is the money flow between the united states and china when it comes to startups, and how much is the risk? lindsey: it is tremendously important. what will be interesting to watch in the coming months and years is i think there will be in some camps of the united states a closer eye in some camps on these investments in industries that some people in the united states consider sensitive, where china is investing, and know how that is getting into u.s. technology, so i think that is going to be a double-edged sword. on the one hand, there are companies definitely reaping the benefits of w

>> i think aib is a perfect example. the u.s. has been criticized for not participating in the aib but when wait formulateses there were a lot of questions what kind of regulations and what kind of government structures aeb will be following and whether the bank will be another chinese policy bank find primarily by the chinese government both or a multilateral development bank that falls a set of international norms. for those thing that take time to see what the institution looks like, and for the projects that aib has funded so far, it's probably not going be a short-term observation. so i think bill is absolutely right, the u.s. faces a question do you want to join without knowing what it is and without knowing what rules are in play there or join early on to also help to shape what the ruleses will look like. >> some might say the current trump administration's tendency is more transactional and don't take the longer view on rule-building. bill, you mentioned the column by larry summers. think one issue he flags as one of the

has been criticized for not participated in the aib. but when it was first formulated there many questions as to what regulations and structure aib will be following and if the bank will be another chinese policy bank funded by the chinese are a multilateral development bank the follow set up of international norms. for those things that take time to see what the institution looks like and for the projects they have funded so far it is probably not going to be a short-term observation. so there right the u.s. base do we want to join without knowing what it is or whether what's in play there or you want to join early on to help shape what it might look like. >> some might say the trump administration is more transactional so they don't necessarily take that longer view or invest in the bank of rule building on a regional basis. you mentioned a column by summers today, one of the issues he flags as something the u.s. is pursuing to his detriment is for instance a more robust regional issues as currency practices. and starting to look ahea

whether that means the united aib, that getse into broader strategic issues, but there will be an asknd push and they will consider it. cory: may be quid pro quo is you come into the aiib, and potentially china can't invest more and u.s. infrastructure. we are seeing chinese money flow into startups in the united snapchat, how important is the flow and how much is it at risk? >> it is tremendously important. what will be interesting to watch in the coming months and is that there will be a closer eye in some camps on these investments in industry that some people in the own and states consider sensitive, where china is investing, and no doubt that is getting into u.s. technology, so that will be a double-edged sword. arene hand, companies reaping the benefits of widespread chinese investment and money they can't get elsewhere. on the other hand, there will be greater sensitivity to where and how the chinese are investing. now to germany, where angela merkel is backing find techn that could to removeif they fail content. if passed, they would be the toughest regulations facebook would

hoover as aibed humanitarian. professor leuchtenburg: i should there was aver -- lady that i greatly admired. my main assessment of coolidge would not be his economic policies but how badly he treated his wife who didn't deserve it. somehow, he managed to survive. she was a teacher in the clark school for the deaf. her that she couldn't smoke, what she had to wear. he was brutish. she did not want to cause difficulty in her marriage. she gathered reporters around her and spoke in sign language. harold: you devote the most pages to franklin roosevelt. century'sim as the giant. service? -- length of service? is it the two crises that he faced? every so leuchtenburg: often, historians get a call from the new york times, time theto rankking american presidents. in the early 1980's. havef these polls resulted in the same rankings presidents ranked as great, near great, below average and failure. only three presidents have been great.as george washington, abraham lincoln, and franklin delano roosevelt. lincoln -- harold

eisueramo miedhi noouf uee af eaife coind .c.on g yo>> y,orer aki smh tnkou aay anthk u weanch iss aib. hesxiins.he 1is rideanwiinesn,t tak aing5%o requ yo 1 cuaieincoat'rgo bom an i ut. 'r 7 rethng ntef i hactizannc i inth iit pie i a tho ulrenctasg vionatju ae tt cae tulychverain suor be tkithsk en w d a ffencr acre res tmendidlg un en a f wld uits it. ndn 300 min m a go msis an be rirento dfentapilie fth ifha trend 'tore' ho oi t tt ede. pali iarcuri tdog dntnds gog or ars. wha g tne fiinr innas rss ui a tt rey f wt t we20 ch. y anyone yop d. m n21 'sstlaonnsf s isllits wrye n asd thhe ge t otoi td ts gngoncasor e my, f e tial rkthisbo 0 losevaab ia gieaha'te avla twi y so. niol an eea. d ncth pereoio y pseer elied nts ou ehtea. thyothoue e founlong sey tapoplth uthecsts thgr l othot ha y sr ndstd e coor eqrea a fl ea tovi tinr opatsnd'msk ts is aou i ty if iisotundndedto srtn gatio ksorthe s enou o aut band a anev thnahethnd ec ia eaexpl tt eraot suordy e pame retis.eror uer weaingintr ipst ne. ren e. eyrenu porlas tnt.meze th si oin ifu onofheng thi itheta m oa ty2.biioudrema e t

either through the aib or through direct form.rica great again? china could have a role in this... james, what are your thoughts? i do agree that they could come out of it looking strong, it is very unreal. there are major strategy issues on the table that, ground is not going to be easy. the south china sea, taiwan, that is a bit like pollyanna. but if we learn to get along, then yes. it is a start. learn to get along... until donald trump's supporters realise all the jobs that he said jobs, he will be re—elected. that is his challenge. i do not see donald trump getting into a trade agreement, and this is one thing that he does not believe in, the trade agreement. but i can see the bilateral relationship between china :——— 44 44 44 4444 444 to those with spiky views on prickly subjects. tonight, it's the turn of george mpanga — better known by his stage name, george the poet. here's his take on keeping it political. entertainers can't sit on the fence. art needs to become political. theresa may has met donald tusk for the first t

i don't think we'll see him on the links like we saw rand paul or aib frbe from japan earlier. >> how do you suppose the president of china deals with donald trump our president in the u.s. differently than with president obama? ? >> well in, the pace of president obama, president obama was quite seasoned as president by the time xi became head of china. and so the initial meetings it was xi who was the rookie in effect. and he was feeling his sayway along. now we have a much more confident xi who is going to be in power for a number of years. he's just strengthened himself with party conference. set pro. he's very sophisticated about these issues. and it's donald trump who comes in and basically as the rookie. i think the chinese are quite confident. they have spent a the love time preparing for this meeting. they put a lot of stock in this relationship. and i think that president trump's going find it as tough as he can sometimes get in his rhetoric. he is dealing with a very, very tough hombre in president xi. >> going back to north korea, we remember that north korea fired off som

difficult problem or challenge to tackle so perhaps we don't want to bet our own homes on whether that will aib com plishd or not. but let's just say rhetorically speaking that some sort of major tax reform is there a scenario out there where in theory the irs could do with fewer resource, less personnel if, indeed, sufficient >> whether it's 3,005,000. if we can hold our own and quit losing people. our i.t. groups are understaffed. we'll have fewer enforcement issues. in light of all the discussions going on, there's not a scenario, i see, that is going to drk marketedly lower the burden we have, of course at the front end we'll have a significant challenge implementing whatever the changes are. >> in the world of things that probably would never have, if there were a flat tax, would you not require fewer people. >> now if we can get -- well by a flat tax, you mean a simple one page form. >> exactly. >> some time ago it was suggested you can do the one page form and get rid of the irs. you have to understand with a one page 1040 ez somebody has to make sure the numbers are right. that's okay w